In yellow are the states won by Ted Cruz, and in blue are the states won by Donald Trump.
Now, here are the results of the 2016 DNC primaries:
In green are the states won by Bernie Sanders, and in yellow are the states won by Hillary Clinton?
Do you notice a pattern? I do. The more ideological candidates (Cruz and Sanders) performed far better in the Western United States, while the more centrist and pragmatic candidates (Trump and Clinton) performed far better in the Eastern United States. Considering that the East is far more populated than the West, it's a no-brainer that Trump and Clinton's sweeping of the East won them their nominations.
But that's not the end of the story. On December 23, 2015, user Nathan G pointed out the following:
The original link can be found here: http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3409Here I should explain my interpretation of the Principle of Localization. Yes, it is true that Europe, China, America, and a number of other places can be subdivided into cultural regions that each bear an individual generational timeline (at least 63 regions from this list, with a possible total of 200-300 in the world). However, when one nation conquers another, the conquerors tend to force a cultural unity that slowly, over about 200 years, causes the regions to synchronize. So my rule of thumb is this: within 200 years of conquest, the regions are unsynchronized, with crisis eras manifesting as revolts. By the 200 year mark, the regions within the empire are synchronized. Thus, if a nation regains its independence within 200 years, it will remain unsynchronized. So Egypt under the Ptolemies was on the same timeline as the Pharaonic period because the Achaemenids never held it for more than 200 years. The Romans, however, held Egypt long enough for their timelines to synchronize around the late 2nd century AD.
So to answer your question, there should be individual timelines for regions within Rome and China during this time, and I would welcome suggestions to fill them in, as long as you understand how regions can be synchronized over time.
This is, again, an issue of subdividing a large empire into smaller cultural regions. Out of the silence of Xenakis, I have my own theory of these regions; however, as it is not thoroughly researched, I did not post it:
SE America:
1676: Bacon's Rebellion, a slave uprising which redefined the way of life in the American South
1783-1795: The Cherokee Wars, in which the South doubled its territory by expanding into the Appalachians
1865-1877: Reconstruction Era, in which the South is invaded by the north, followed by a number of insurrections, revolts, and terrorist acts
1941-1945: WWII, after the South finally synchronizes with the north after being unified for about 170 years
West coast America:
1765-1769: Spanish Conquest of the region
1846-1848: Mexican-American War in which America invades and conquers the region
c.1890-1910: The "Wild West", in which western America suffers from lawlessness and anarchy
c.1970-1980: Several outbreaks of homicides and riots in reaction to the end of segregation
Due to the west being ruled by America for less than 200 years, it is still unsynchronized and currently in an Awakening Era, explaining why California is more philosophical than the east.
Now, compare 2016 to 1980, when Ronald Reagan, a philosopher candidate, won the GOP nomination and then the presidency. If Nathan G's assertion is correct, in 2016, the East was in a crisis period while the West was in an awakening period. In 1980, the East was in an awakening perior while the West was in a crisis period. In 1980, Reagan won overwhelmingly in the GOP primaries.
Because a philosopher won the East in 1980 and a pragmatist won the East in 2016, while a philosopher won the West in 2016, could Generational Dynamics serve as a possible explanation for Trump and Clinton's victories?